i thought long and hard how to brand the fiscal showdown coverage today. i have settled on slope. but we're still spinning the wheel. >> somehow i see a foregone conclusion with that. i'm krystal ball. >> a toure. why it's so expensive to stay healthy unless you're royalty. >> i'm lady cupp. you can be royalty, too. it's what you get for the friend who has everything. á>> all that and ken burns take a seat at the table on wednesday, december 5th. 27 days to go in the debt fight and republicans say the next 72 hours are critical. so we'll have the last several

weeks just for show? it's time to spin the wheel of misfortune and today we are going with fiscal slope. gradual fiscal slope, actually. a term i tried to coin a few weeks ago. anyway, i guess not much changed since then. both sides are locked in a stalemate. >> in any way suggest that they're going to tie negotiations to debt ceiling votes and take us to the brink of default once again as part of a budget negotiation which by the way we have never done in our history until we did it last year. i will not play that game. >> despite the doomsday talk in washington on wall street there's a sense of optimism. just an hour before markets close and the markets don't seem very fazed by the fiscal slope. usually the opposite of what happens so to kick things off today, we start with neil irwin,

colonim columnist at "the washington post." when the election ended and looking aheadç there's a conventional wisdom apparent in the coverage that, wow, to have this drama for a few months of the year, unsettle, roil the markets and not doing that and seems like the markets sort of telling us, you know, even if you go over the so-called cliff and down the gradual slope for a few days or weeks in january, that's not going to both earl us either. >> whyeah. there's a huge disconnect. there's almost a what me worry approach in the financial markets. these measures of volatility that predict the ups and downs to see are low. wall street isn't nervous right now and the interesting thing is it going to take panic on the markets to drive a deal? if you're a republican to vote for tax increases, entitlement cuts, does it take scary stuff on the markets to force you to action? >> so i guess your colleague at

"the washington post" today, matt miller, wrote a column and looking at the possibility or the prospect of sort of a p perpetual fiscal cliff and using the debt ceiling to force concessions. they, you know, used cliche they kicked the can down the road to the super committee and that blew up and now this and talk of a two-prong solution and then dealing with entitlements next year. it does seem like we just keep making, you know, small incremental decisions and then putting off somethingç bigger r six months, a year, 18 months. when will the insanity stop on this? >> yeah. i mean, the thing is -- >> 300 calories! >> stop the insanity! >> that was -- that was susan powter. i knew we talked about it before the show and didn't know we

would play it. when will we listen and stop the insanity? feel free to answer. >> yeah. look. you know, it's a real dynamic in place where it takes the horrible things to happen, a risk of a recession, of a debt ceiling, you know, defaulting on u.s. debt, it takes the really dramatic things to force action but it gets back to the issue of where are the power levers and the forcing mechanisms to make the government deal with the deficit? that's not coming from the markets. the bond market is saying here's the money you want and we're kind of creating these things out of nowhere to force us to deal with the long-term deficit problem but the short term markets aren't doing it. >> neil, talk about these markets you speak of. i want to play a clip of maria the other day. >> the markets right now are expecting a deal. the markets have been trading fine. if we don't gate deal, we are going to see a sizable decline

in stocks. we are going to get a big disappointment. >> markets will be disappointed. the markets have expectations. who is this mr. markets that is endowed with the personality anç expectations and is this monolithic creature that will respond to, you know, what's going on in washington? are we giving the markets a little bit too much personality here? >> well, yeah. i mean, obviously the market is millions of people and institutions all over the world deciding whether to buy stocks or bonds or whatever but more broadly, you know, it is true that markets aren't, you know, they're not always rational. we have seen this a number of times when, you know, for a long time, for example, before the crisis of 2008, markets saying it will work out. it will be fine. it took this failure of lehman brothers and a collapse to really deal with what we were dealing with in 2008. look. markets aren't perfect predictors but they're telling

us something. >> neil, you wrote something that i found interesting. a point i didn't hear anyone else made. from the column, what's going on right now is kabuki theater but they're actors in the play, as well. not just the audience. their role is to be a sort of forcing mechanism of their own only when they start to panic will there be pressure on lawmakers to take some hard votes. so interesting take. i sort of agree with that but does that indicate we would be in a better place if the markets were freaking out? >> i think the negotiation would be further along. we are in the stage of proposal and counterproposal. there may be things behind the scenes we are not aware of in ç public, at least, this is a very early stage and considering it's three weeks away. we don't have time. christmas holiday in there. >> you are saying the markets still could freak out? >> absolutely. i mean, getting to the end of december and no real movement toward a deal, you know, if we get to december 27th and close

to a deal, takes a few days to get it passed through congress and signed, this's not a big deal. to the 25th, 26th, 27th, no progress, that's -- you know, there's ever reason to think we'll see some real movements that make people nervous about the 401(k) and call the congressman and say what are you doing? >> will they be able to call if they're not in d.c.? the house canceled thursday leaving only three more days for them to negotiate in 2012 to avert the cliff. what do you make of this move? should we make a lot out of it? cantor and boehner saying we don't have anything to vote on and going to go home and why do we have to sit here and wait to vote? is this more as krystal said kabuki theater, bad optics, a maneuver of political warfare? >> yeah. this is -- look, this is the gamesmanship we see when there's standoffs. i won't come to you. you come to me.

boehn boehner's position is we've given you our plan and now for you, mr. president, to come back with what you're willing to do and probably not in a way we're aware of and sutd l calls between, you know, negotiators for the president and the congressionalç republicans. whether the out ho house is in session only matters with a deal and manager to vote on. look. just because things are bogged down and in the standoff mode right now doesn't mean all is lost. it just means we don't know for sure that any progress is being made. >> there's another item here that i cannot let the segment end without addressing. critical both for us and the country. let's take a look. >> stop insta-gramming your breakfast and tweeting the first world problems and getting on youtube to see gangnam style. ♪ and start using those precious social media skills to go out

and sign people up on this baby, three people a week. let it grow and don't forget, take part or get taken apart. boy, these old coots will clean out the treasury before you get there. >> that's alan simpson with a bold call for citizens to demand a bipartisan common sense solution and i have to say i want a common sense solution. bold as that may sound, i want a common sense solution. >> krystal, i don't want to -- you know, i don't want to explode people's minds here but i think i agree with you. >> no. >> i also want a solution. but i refuse to stop insta-gramming my breakfast. that i kabt support. that's something i like to do a lot. it's something that's important to me. i won't go there but i want a >> that doesn't have the classic -- >> when do president obama and john boehner do the gangnam style dance and then we'll be in a better place. >> you know, i want to say

quickly, that reminds me of al simpson doing that, say what you will about him. he has a showman's flare. when he retired from the senate in 1996, he came up to the kennedy school in cambridge and he was working there with robert reich and got together and pitched a public television show. it's alan simpson's 6'7", robert reich, 4'10" and called it the long and the short of it. >> i know you're not making it up. >> comedy and politics, road trips. i watched it! senior in high school. i even attended a taping. >> last question. will you boldly go on the record right now and right here to support a common sense solution. >> everyone has a different deaf situation of common sense. that's too easy. >> neil irwin, thank you for joining us. ahead, washington may be stuck in the neutral but the rest of the country is moving forward. new numbers of pot and gay marriage will have you talking. it's in the spin cycle as we

roll on for wednesday, december 5th. questions? anyone have occasional constipation, diarrhea, gas, bloating? yeah. one phillips' colon health probiotic cap each day helps defend against these digestive issues with three strains of good bacteria. approved! [ phillips' lady ] live the regular life. phillips'. now's a good time to think about your options. are you looking for a plan that really meets your needs? and your budget? as you probably know, medicare only covers about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you. so consider an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like all standardized medicare supplement plans, they pick up some of what medicare doesn't pay. and could save you in out-of-pocket medical costs every year. call today to request a free decision guide. with this type of plan, you'll be able to visit any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients...

plus, there are no networks, and you'll never need a referral to see a specialist. if you're thinking about your options, call today. when you call, request your free decision guide. and find the aarp medicare supplement plan that may be right for you. yofor giving the perfect gift?le just have a knack they put real thought into it. and find just... the right...thing. how do they do that? more saving. more doing. that's the power of the home depot. pick up a ridgid jobmax multi-tool starter kit and get a free head attachment. starts with ground beef, unions, and peppers baked in a ketchup glaze with savory gravy and mashed russet potatoes. what makes stouffer's meatloaf best of all?

that moment you enjoy it at home. stouffer's. let's fix dinner.

friday marks the last chance this year that the supreme court could decide to take up gay marriage but the court of public opinion is in full session. new quinnipiac poll shows for the first time ever a majority of white catholics support gay marriage. still, most americans remain divided on the issue but it's close. gay marriage to pot, the same poll clearly shows that times, they are a-changing and brings us to today's "spin." when i was looking at the poll,

not surprising, the major gap between young people and older people in terms of their attitudes, you know, young voters 18 to 29, support same-sex marriage. 67-29% of legalizing marijuana and reminded me in the wake of the election, ran paul suggested that maybe republicans could take up legalizing marijuana, at least decriminalizing marijuana. it's not actually a bad idea because it's very hard for the republican party given their reliance on the religious right as such a critical part of their coalition to fully imbrace gay marriage and they could sort of tamp down their vocal opposition to it. but i would think that there would be less resistance to supporting some sort of reforms in terms of theúwhy we deal with the war on drugs and it could provide somewhat of an opening to the younger generation.

>> that statistic there, 18 to 29-year-olds, in general that's where change comes from, that demographic, younger people. we saw take just the overall vote in the presidential election, there was a bigger gap this year than we have ever seen between the voting preferences of 18 to 29-year-olds and the voting preference of people a generation or two older than them. there's more stark difference and more dramatic this year an ever seen and gay marriage with 28-point support, 18 to 29. but i think that also works in terms of a sort of a force for change. it works within the republican party and take the issue of gay marriage. i'm sort of -- i'm trying to wonder and fig oure out in my head -- when will the party evolve and say it's fine and we're fine with it. i see it happening eventually and because of this -- demographics in age.

look at evangelicals, roughly half of the republican party, almost half the republican party in terms of voting share in this year's shares identifies as evangelicals, asking them their view on gay marriage, you can't measure the support. so tiny. ask 18 to 29-year-olds evangelicals of gay marriage and support level at 44%.ç might have gone up since then and close to 50% among -- evangelicals and where the resistance coming from in the republican party so as that sort of cohort ages, expands, ages out, that's the future for the republican party. the change comes from within. >> there's a question there, too, of the younger ones sort of having an influence on the older generation and happening at times, too. >> maybe. i'm optimistic about the marriage equality in this country. not necessarily optimistic about the republican party coming along without being forced to come along but i'm looking at the quinnipiac numbers,

encouraged about the future of the war on drugs. there's tremendous support of people for marijuana legalization, total numbers, 51% in favor of legalizing marijuana. among independent voters, 58% in favor. obviously, most democrats are in favor and most republicans -- >> where's the tremendous support in 51% is basically split. 51 to 44, there's a clear majority outside of the margin of error supporting marijuana legalization. men are strongly in favor. white people in favor 50 to 46. black people in favor 57 to 37. what's interesting is black people far more socially conservative. the gallup poll talked about the religious ethnic group in america. hispanics are tied. women and i don't understand why are against marijuana legalization, 52% to 44%. but i think a lot of americans are seeing that theç prohibiti of marijuana is not working.

it is not positive. marijuana's not a gateway drug. criminalizing weed is not sustainable. we have to treat it like alcohol. >> i think if we can just talk about sort of what republicans need to do about the youth vote, to sort of synthesize all of your points here, i think it's really tricky because young people by definition become older people. right? so it's hard to treat them as a monolith. young peoples' views on taxes change as they get older and different than women voters and black voters and gay voters who will always be women and black and gay. it's disingenuous for republicans to say we're pro-pot and then young people we're pro-pot. i don't think that looks very good so i think as i've said before when it comes to gay marriage and pot, maybe a less strident message is a good one, a more inclusive message.

we have talked about ways the republican party can be sort of more open about gay marriage and decriminaliziing marijuana, too. i don't think catering to young people is really the authentic way to go. >> do you think a smaller government issue, right? government getting out of your bedroom that if people want to smoke a little weed, go ahead. it is okay. >> i want a big tentç party an voices like ran paul to exist without being castigated out of the party for having those voices. that's inclusion. what i don't want is for people with traditional views on certain things to feel like they have no party. no one represents them anymore. so i think if the republican party can be that big tent and say, well, there's room for you here, but we are also going to be open minded on the issues, that could work out for them. >> i totally get what you're saying and definitely this is the case where you find young

people and saying something at 20 and then at 60 say, what was i thinking at 20? my question on gay marriage is, is this one of those things that isn't going to change? growing up in a different world. >> i think -- >> trying to defend the traditional values but not expand the tent and won't have the big tent -- >> i think we need to speak to both people and allowing for people with those traditional views to not feel like they're terrible people and to feel like they have a home and speak up for their values i think is appropriate but also usher in a new generation i think of conservatives and voters in general who are more open minded. absolutely. >> well, the stat showed, too, not just young voters changing on their acceptance of gay marriage. voters across all demographics are moving more in favor of supporting gay marriage. all right. straight ahead. theç gop would have you believ medicare will make us all broke

but in the guest spot the new republicans jonathan koen said, not so fast. "your business" entrepreneur of the week. she wanted to introduce kimchi to main street america. she created mother-in-law's kimchi. she is using nonethnic packaging to appeal to a mass market and the product is in whole foods and presh markets. for more, watch "your business" on msnbc. [ male announcer ] this is sheldon, whose long dy setting up the news

starts with arthritis pain and a choice. take tylenol or take aleve, the #1 recommended pain reliever by orthopedic doctors. just two aleve can keep pain away all day. back to the news. bp has paid overthe people of bp twenty-threeitment to the gulf. billion dollars to help those affected and to cover cleanup costs. today, the beaches and gulf are open, and many areas are reporting their best tourism seasons in years. and bp's also committed to america. we support nearly 250,000 jobs and invest more here than anywhere else. we're working to fuel america for generations to come. our commitment has never been stronger. why they have a raise your rate cd. tonight our guest, thomas sargent. nobel laureate in economics, and one of the most cited economists in the world. professor sargent, can you tell me

what cd rates will be in two years? no. if he can't, no one can. that's why ally has a raise your rate cd. ally bank. your money needs an ally.

fiscal cliff, the thing we are trying to avoid, had $1.2 trillion in cuts but half are to defense. this has $1.2 trillion in cuts but they're just saying make the whole thing cuts to entitlements in domestic spending and not cut defense at all? trying to entice the democrats saying, i don't want you to fall off this cliff so why don't you voluntarily jump off this steeper cliff but don't worry, your fall will be cushioned by

lava. >> that is jon stewart's take on the gop's fiscal cliff offer. he's right. we are better off stumbling down the slope like drunken fools than the republican offer out there. here to explain that and why a huge part of the talks making major changes to medicare may be totally unnecessary is jonathan cohn and joins us now. jon, i think that's a good place to start is this. itç seems like all of the discussions about medicare, in relation to the fiscal cliff or in general seems to have an ajumpgs a assumption it's a big program and in dire need for cutting and reform but there's a basic myth at work there of the efficiency of medicare. >> yeah. medicare is expensive. why are we going to have the big

deficits? mostly because of medicare and medicaid. that's not medicare's fault. it's a very efficient program and run by the government. so it doesn't have a lot of overhead. it has enormous economies of scale and bargain for better rates of doctors and hospitals dictate prices so for what it provides, medicare's very cheap. it's getting expensive over time because a lot more people are going on to the program and in general the health care system, public health insurance, private health insurance, it's all very expensive and only so much right now that medicare can do about it. the problem isn't medicare, per se. not that medicare is a wasteful program but the health care system is -- and health care costs and getting in to the guts of the health care system and rather than lopping off a sum of health care. >> if we lowered health care costs overall, the cost of

medicare goes down andç medica more affordable without necessarily even needing to tinker with medicare and the point of something that you were writing about. we have all the conversations about hundreds of billions and cutting from medicare to deal with the fiscal cliff right now but your point is, if we can get the cost of health care under control we don't need to cut anything right now and there are actually you're saying pilot programs in place thanks to the affordable care act aimed to cut the cost of health care. can you get in to the programs are and how much promise they hold for over the next few years bringing that cost down? >> sure. i mean, you know, it's funny. there's a myth out there that affordable care act, obama care, maybe insurance to a lot of people and didn't do anything about costs. nothing could be further from the truth. it took a lot of money out of health care costs. some of it cutting corporate waste. spending less money to pay private insurance companies offering alternative coverage to medicare patients and a lot of

it is pilot programs, experim t experiments. we have lots of ideas for reducing the cost of health care. an example, you know, what if we told hospitals, if you don't run a clean hospital and patients are getting infections, we pay you a little less. hopefully that's incentive to not give these patients infections and if they don't get infections, they won't come back for readmission and run up big bills. if that works, we'll save some money. and there's about -- several dozen experiments like that. obama care basically said, let's try them and a fewç conservati ideas like mal practice insurance. i call it a throw it at the wall strategy. other people do, too. basically throw the stuff at the wall. try everything. see what sticks. see what works. and then come back in two or three or five years and say this experiment is saving some money. let's expand it. let's put more money behind it and more incentive and this one isn't working. all right. get rid of it. you know, and even if just a few of these work, there's so much

waste in the health care system and even if just a few of work, we'll save an enormous amount of money and go a listening way to saving the fiscal problem. >> jonathan, it seems, though, democrats have made medicare something of a sacred cow and maybe to their own peril. i'll quote david kendall with a post up in "the washington post." he's senior fellow at third way. he basically says, look, medicare will have to be trimmed and many democrats see that as a concession. you need to fix medicare to save it. which should be something that all democrats want to do. are democrats sort of losing sight of the goal here to preserve medicare and you can do by making it less expensive and more cost effective and improve the quality? >> well, i don't think they're losing sight at all. let's rewind the clock about, oh, a month, two months. you know, before the election. you may recall hearing all the time, you know, mitt romney and the republicans going after obama for that $700 billion in

medicare cuts. wellç you know why he was sayi that? because obama and the affordable care act cut medicare by $700 billion. they did it in a very careful way. they did it in a way to protect beneficiaries and responsible. they faced up. they said medicare does need to be trimmed. we need to do it in a smart way and did this. >> why is it off the table now? >> well, precisely because they did -- took that step. they took that very big step and now everyone -- now the idea's, all right, we took the found cut and starting the experiments now. let's see how they work. there's a very good chance, in fact, we are seeing signs that some of them are starting to save some money. we cut $700 billion. we have these pilot programs going forward. let's watch. we have taken enough out of medicare for now and see how the experiments go. if they work out and if a few of them work out, we'll get bigger shape and in better shape fiscally. >> the line in the sand of the president is not don't touch

medicare but the benefits provided but back to what you were saying about the way that republicans handled medicare in the last election, you know, there seems to be a sense on the right that the politics of entitlement reform changed, even though mitt romney lost, he ran with paul ryan on the ticket, it turned out not to be toxic for seniors and won the senior vote and, of course, the counter to that is like you just said that, yes, they managed to muddy the waters on medicare basically demagoguing against the president for the cutsç to medicare so what's the truth here? do you think that republicans feel sort of emboldened on entitle reform, this it's no longer the third rail? and are they -- is it legitimate to feel that way? >> well, you know, i don't know what they think. they keep changing their minds what they like and don't like. i imagine some of them feel like the politics changed and maybe in a small way it has. you know, maybe it is safe to talk about making changes to

medicare. but like you said, i mean, there are two kinds of changes. there are the changes that save health care. that save money in health care. you know? these kind of pilot programs and president obama as you pointed out has proposed a few more of these and then there are changes to benefits. there are cuts to benefits. these are the ideas that you hear from republicans. you know, raising the retirement change in medicare. scaling back. i don't think the politicless of that changed one bit. in fact, i think if you look at the polls these ideas, raising the medicare age, you know, cutting on benefits, making direct cuts to benefits, remember a lot of cuts of seniors, there's an idea they're affluent. a lot of them are not. those ideas are still pretty toxic. >> all right. probably can't be repeated enough. it's not medicare that's expensive but health care. jonathan, thank you so much for joining us. straight ahead, award-winning director and

documentary maker ken burns joins us. there is a lot to talk about here.

but when i was in an accident... i was worried the health care system spoke a language all its own with unitedhealthcare, i got help that fit my life. so i never missed a beat. that's health in numbers. unitedhealthcare.

well, having a ton of locations doesn't hurt. and a santa to boot! [ chuckles ] right, baby. oh, sir. that is a customer. oh...sorry about that.

[ male announcer ] break from the holiday stress. fedex office. fiveç youths were arrestedt 96 street between 14 and 15 years of age. >> they got 'em! >> you can only imagine the pressure to have this crime solved and solved quickly. >> first he was altogether and then started to put us in different rooms separated. >> what did you do? who were you with? who did you come with? the tone was very scary. i thought they might kill us. >> never go home until you give up the story. >> i told my son, go to the park that night. i feel guilty. >> one of the most infamous crime cases started in 1989 and lingers today. a white woman jogger was found beaten and raped. a group of boys were made to implicate each other and yikly convicted despite no evidence

and no dna. after the five served their time, sentences of seven to 13 years, a man came forward to confess. their convictions were overturned but nothing could return the lives they'd lost. a decade ago, they sued the city which has admitted wrongful convictions and that suit is unresolved. the latest project of ken burns is titled "the central park five." it's in select theaters right now. airs on pbs on april 16th. we are honored to have ken burns with us now. how are you? >> very well. i have to say this is a film not only of my own but my daughter id my son-in-law. >> wow. >> we know how children give us fantastic ideas. >> it is a family affair. >> a spend a lot of time talking about how the false accusations were elicited. i think that's the bulk of the piece. and my wife is watching with me.

she's like, how did they say what they didn't do? i don't think people how it's coar coerced. >> we say, i would have never done that. >> right. >> but we weren't 14, 15 or 16 years old. we weren't in interrogations, intense interrogations for upwards of 30 hours by the finest new york city's finest. has to offer. kids who had never been in the system before. were good kids. lower middle class kids with good grades, were artists, baseball players and trying to cooperate and saying, look, we know you're a good guy. she's saying you did it. if you say we think she did it, you can go home. it's now 30 hours, parents are pacing outside. sometimes they're allowed to be in with you. when they're not, they're really in your face an you think, as he said in the clip he showed, that they're going to kill you. you think maybe i'm implicate them and then go home.

it was a circular firing squad. and in retrospect, watching this i went in thinking how would you possibly confess? i was in new york at the time going, what's wrong with ourç cities? what's wrong with the parenti parentings? what's wrong? you can see how easily when you're stuck in some false narrative as the cops and prosecutors did and the truth is a train leaving the station and your train going in a different direction and the media's demanding this and buying it and not questioning it. you realize that five human beings were expendable. what our film attempted to do is listen to them whochlt are you? what happened that night? because we turn them in to -- you remember. wilding wolf pack beasts and they weren't human beings anymore and nobody thought to check their stories as is the responsibility of the press and say, wait a second. there's no dna. there's nothing of the crime scene of them and nothing of them on the crime scene.

their own statements are contradictory to the time line. >> to each other. >> to each other. and then when they had this dna sample, the semen sample that didn't match any of them, they invented another narrative of a sixth person and how come he didn't show up in the coerced con convictions? the system of justice failed us. it's very interesting in this story that a psychopathic rapist and murderer, because if he had been caught, he would not have gone on to murder a pregnant woman. the cops had his name two days before t$s crime and never followed through it. he went on to rape and maim and kill a pregnant woman again. he had a crisis of conscience in jail 13 years later after bumping in to the oldest of them and confessed. >> talk about that moment, right? the truth doesn't really set you free because they were set free at the end of their sentences.

>> yeah. they served out the full sentences. let's remember that. >> they got the wrongful convictions and their lives are not reparable. they're still completely messed up. even though now the world knows they didn't do it and they were right saying they were innocent, not getting money from the city. >> it was page a-1 when the crime happened forever. but because the press was come police it they didn't go when the convictions were vacated and say, boy, we really screwed up. how can we make you whole? when the civil suit is launched, they remained more or less silent and permitted the forces to continue to paint the alternative crazy narratives while they were in the park, must have done something. they served out the full sentences for the crime they didn't do. they're black. they must have done -- all this other stuff to protect the cops and the prosecutors who just clearly made a mistake. reinvestigation by district attorney robert morgenthal

shows. >> but part of this, i think, tell me if i'm wrong hereç and grew out of the culture of new york. >> yes. >> the murder rate like 2,000. the cover of "the new york post" every day -- todays is like celebrities every aother day. it was crime day in, day out. how much did that contribute? >> huge here. it's huge. we perceive the threat coming from the black and brown community. and there was, you know, series of racial indents throughout city. murders of various people. eleanor bumpers, various cases and made us fearful and so when this happened, let's not go in to the fact of many other interracial rapes and murders that got no coverage but this is the crime of the century ed koch said and a test of the justice system. it may now be in the totality of

how much it represents in a microcosm all of american history and the strange, long trip with race and the way it's an excuse for absolutely everything. but it certainly was a test of the justice system and it failed. >> and to that point, i mean, what's the bigger takeaway you want people to take from the film that you took from this film? >> jim dwyer and says i wish had been more skeptical. he was the most skeptical at the time and puts it in big and very tiny and human terms. he says we all make mistakes and whether you own them or not and what we have found now is 13 years of justice denied for % these kids, this unbelievable tragedy. ten years of justice delay as the city puts the slows on this civil suit that they have launched against them and the city, it's good for the five, good for their families and the city for all of us to put a period on the end of this thing.

but justice delayed is also justice denied and it is all because they're unable to admit a mistake. and i think this is going to change when someone, the mayor or someone wakes up in a high ranks in the administration saying remind me again why we're protecting the cops and proers who screwed up back then and got the wrong guy and prosecuted these innocent kids for this crime. why are we doing this? at that point we have the ability to say, yeah, we all mick mistakes. >> own them and move on. >> they have to come up with several millions of dollars. >> that's for the lawyers. as the five themselves say, there's no amount of money that can return that whole. if we thought, think back 14 or 15 or 16 years old and then put a gap. you know? first kiss, first date and prom. >> oh all gone, all gone. >> house, marriage, career. all gone. all gone. >> and you never get it back. you put it in the context of '80s and '90s in new york but

nothing to say it couldn't happen right now. >> it is happening. >> thank you very much. up next, on a much lighter note, cyclists are titled. lady s.e. will be back to explain. [ nyquil bottle ] hey tylenol, you know we're kinda like twins. [ tylenol bottle ] we are? yeah we both relieve coughs, sneezing, aches, fevers. and i relieve nasal congestion. overachiever. [ female announcer ] tylenol® cold multi-symptom nighttime relieves nasal congestion. nyquil® cold and flu doesn't.

wanted to provide better employee benefits while balancing the company's bottom line, their very first word was... [ to the tune of "lullaby and good night" ] ♪ af-lac ♪ aflac [ male announcer ] find out more at... [ duck ] aflac! [ male announcer ] ...forbusiness.com. [ yawning sound ] in today's "back spin" we are all over the royal baby mania. i mean, we have got a pregnant lady on our team so why wouldn't

we be? looks like the duchess of cambridge is feeling better after three days a the a hospital with severe morning sickness. yikes. something to keep in mind is that will and kate's baby will be third in line for the crown behind daddy william. no matter their sex, thanks to new cabinet rules. so it looks like hotty prince harry not my choice to say what is now fourth in line for the crown. sorry, harry. but enough about the royals. i would like to share with you that i've now become a bit royal myself. please refer to me as lady cupp of scotland. there's paperwork and everything. you could be a lady or lord, too, starting at just $49.99. highlandç titles is offering u up to 1,000 square feet, depending on how much you're willing to spend. let's take it it to the table and my fellow royalty. it's true. i now have a 10x10 square feet,

plot of land, that comes with a title, lady cupp, you're lady ball, lord kornacki, lord taure -- >> what's mine? >> i don't get there often but when i get my land, i'll turn it into a hunting preserve. even though it's small, i will make sure that every inch of that land is covered in some kind of trap or snare situation. i will call it the "i ain't no lady cupp's shooting gallery." krystal, what are you going to do? >> i also decided based on your bold choice what to do with my land. i'm going to try to get my land to be adjacent to yours. i will set up a wildlife preserve so that animals being savaged, blood-thursy cupp land

can come to lady ball's land, terrified of lady cupp. >> will you have signs that say enter here, here -- >> i'm going a slightly different directionality i like your direction a lot more than what's going on over here.ç i'm creating lord toure's oasis where only awesome things are allowed. man cave, giant tv, sports swings -- >> it's only 10x10 -- >> stop it. i'm dreaming big. just because i'm dreaming big, you ladies aren't, don't step on my party. >> it's so realistic. >> enjoy your man cave, your preserve, your hunting area because i am going to pull a donald trump and team up with the scottish government and we're going to seize all of your land and we're going to build the biggest, best, most

beautiful one-hole mini golf course in all of the world. >> because that's what scotland needs, another golf course. >> how are you seizing our land? >> did you see this thing about trump? he took this guy's farmland in scotland with approval of the government. all the locals stood up to him calling him scotsman of the year for standing up to donald trump. >> the can hole with the clown face on it. >> you got it worked out. >> scotland is lucky we stumbled upon this story. up next, steve and i have gotten a lot of feedback on our debate over gun control monday. his response to your responses is next. wasn't my daughter's black bean soup spectacular?

[ man thinking ] oh, this gas. those antacids aren't working. oh no, not that, not here! [ male announcer ] antacids don't relieve gas. gas-x is designed to relieve gas. gas-x. the gas xperts.

gas-x is designed to relieve gas. social security are just numbers thinkin a budget.d... well, we worked hard for those benefits. we earned them. and if washington tries to cram decisions about the future... of these programs into a last minute budget deal... we'll all pay the price. aarp is fighting to protect seniors with responsible... solutions that strengthen medicare and... social security for generations to come. we can do better than a last minute deal... that would hurt all of us.

we got a lot of feedback for something i said in the show, so much i thought i should respond to it. the subject was guns and domestic violence and here's what i said. >> in a house with a gun, a domestic disturbance is 12 times more likely to end in homicide. a woman living in a house way gun is five times more likely to be murdered. two-thirds of all women who are killed by guns in this country, by the way, that's five women a day, two-thirds are in domestic disturbances. you don't say it's just about the gun here and we're ignoring domestic violence. there's a link here.

i probably seemed pretty worked up, i was and i am. it's how i feel every time i hear about an innocent life taken by gun violence. the loss of life saddens me but what enrages me is the fact it's going to happen again and again. i received thoughtful dissents and i got a lot of critical e-mails that employed an argument that doesn't hold çup. the claim focusing on guns was pointless. surprising number of e-mailers brought up nicole brown simpson, the same woman i believe o.j. simpson killed with a knife in 1994. see, they said, guns have nothing to do with this. suppose you want to ban all knives, too. yes, of course, guns aren't the only tool a killer can use. there are plenty of cases of deadly domestic violence where a gun is nowhere in sight. let's not talk about anecdotes. let's talk about statistics. if it's not a gun, it will just be some other weapon. argument was valid then you would expect domestic disputes

would be just as likely to turn deadly with or without guns. in the death houses most or all of the deaths would be from shooting. the numbers say there is a -- that there is a huge difference between the likelihood of a domestic dispute turning deadly in a house with a gun than in a house without one. i'm not calling for banning guns. from a policy standpoint, i don't know what i am calling for, except this, can we blees acknowledge the statistics out there that show a clear link between deadly domestic violence and guns? can we use that information as the basis for a real conversation about what we can do so that stories like javon's aren't so routine? that does it for "the cycle" today. martin bashir, take it away. >> thank you so much.ç i agree entirely. good afternoon, wednesday, december 5th. republicans say the next 72